Bill Gates has a clear vision of a better world through working together for peace, prosperity, plentiful energy, good education, strong economies and respect for the environment. This requires advanced nuclear power technologies which he is spending billions of his hard earned fortune on to develop. Will the politicians and regulators stop holding nuclear back?
Melissa Goh, writer for CNBC: Nuclear power will grow by about 46 percent by 2040 — and more than 90 percent of the net increase will come from China and India, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). With a shortage of fossil fuels, India is pursuing nuclear investments as an alternative to add to the country's energy mix. China's expansion of nuclear production capabilities comes amid its push toward greater energy efficiency and a diversification away from fossil fuels.
Equally important are two things that this article does not talk about. 1) The growth numbers for nuclear are still small compared to China's, India's and the world's total energy usage. 2) Almost no nuclear power growth is forecast for the rest of the world.
Anti-nuclear forces and their partners in government are prevailing for the moment, making countries disastrously dependent on wind, solar and foreign fossil fuels. This could lead to the collapse of Western Civilization. Other countries will be able to take over the world without much military action needed, when the West has little control over their energy supplies. The United States allows itself to be occupied with a case before the Supreme Court where "a few children" insist on stopping use of fossil fuels. Vaclav Smil in his book, "Energy and Civilization," makes perfectly clear how important fossil fuels are. But these particularly privileged children and their legal and scientific handlers demand that the whole world abandon these tremendous energy resources.
Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska: As our nuclear leadership declines, we are simultaneously losing our ability to influence security and nonproliferation decisions. Taking our place — but not always sharing our views — are countries that could put world security interests at risk. After inventing commercial nuclear power, the U.S. has now clearly fallen behind. Yet we can still turn the tide and restore our influence, particularly if we pursue the development of advanced reactors.
The World Nuclear Association Weekly Newsletter for February 23, 2018 reports that the USA is going to start research on fast reactors again. The United States had a tremendous lead in the 1970s. Presidents Carter and Clinton, President Obama's Science Advisor John Holdren, Natural Resources Defense Council's Thomas Cochran, and Princeton's Frank Von Hippel worked hard to close fast reactors in the USA. The United States may restart research on fast reactors after losing three decades of progress to the Russians and Chinese. Good for Russia and China. Very unfortunate for the USA. The world needs all the energy that it can get from fossil fuels and nuclear. With no false obstacles in the way, the USA could be self-sufficient and an exporter of energy and energy technologies to make a better world for people and nature.
Charles Barton, lead advocate for advanced nuclear power technologies, in particular from thorium: Thomas B. Cochran is a lobbyist employed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, to attack nuclear power on a full time basis. As befits a Lobbyist, Cochran is well compensated. In 2006 Cochran was one of the 5 highest paid employees of the NRDC, with a total compensation package approaching $200,000. In 2006 the largest single foundation donor to the the NRDF was the Energy Foundation, an environmental funding NGO, that also funds many other anti-nuclear "environmental organizations.
Neil Alexander, Ph.D. radiation damage in steels, business strategist, consultant and advocate for nuclear energy: In this world, when we finally admit the renewables experiment was a failure, we will look around and find we have few other options available to us. New nuclear if we need it will take decades to research, develop, test, license and deploy.
Michel Gay, l'Association des écologistes pour le nucléaire (AEPN): L'énergie nucléaire continuera a jouer un role significatif dans le futur bouquet énergétique mondial, mais une meilleure valorisation de l'uranium sera nécessaire dans de nouveaux réacteurs pour poursuivre au-dela de ce ciécle.
Eric Jelinski has engineering degrees in three disciplines, teaches nuclear engineering curriculum at the University of Toronto, had a full career with the nuclear power industry in Canada and was President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - Canada. In this short essay, he outlines a few simple steps to make large improvements in energy programs for North America. So simple, but national leaders haven't implemented them so far.
John Shanahan, civil engineer, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA: China, France, Russia, South Korea are countries with a bright future for nuclear power, even oil exporting countries have plans for nuclear power. The United States has minimal plans beyond the first generation of commercial power plants. This is disgraceful. The anti-nuclear organizations, spokespersons, and the public that agree with them can cheer for the moment. Modern societies need fossil fuels and nuclear power to prosper for the long term future. Things have to change and will.
Gary Young, mechanical engineer, major product development manager - Before retirement, he worked on product development that significantly contributed to profitability of a global technology company: How do solar, wind, hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear compare for energy return on investment? What will happen if the United States does not continue with a second generation of nuclear power plants?